IMPORTANT: JREF Forums is now the International Skeptics Forum. If you are a past member of the JREF Forums you must agree to the new terms and conditions to post, send PMs, or continue to use the forum as a member. You can view them here, or you will be presented with them when you try to make a post or PM or similar.

Your private information was removed in transferring to the new forum. If you'd like to import it please see the instructions in this thread to approve transfer.
If you are having problems accessing the Forum you can contact Darat at isforum@internationalskeptics.com, please include your username and forum email address in any email.
NOTE:** TAPATALK access is currently disabled **. This is just while we work out how to ensure people have to agree to the T&Cs before posting here via Tapatalk

Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

The stolen passports seem real, yet the incident itself smacks of a hoax, as a media diversion from the Ukraine situation.

"Malaysia Airlines flight MH 370

... After the airline released a manifest of the 239 people on the plane, Austria denied that one of its citizens was on the flight as the list had stated. The Austrian citizen was safe and sound, and his passport had been stolen two years ago, Austrian Foreign Ministry spokesman Martin Weiss said.

Similarly, Italy's foreign ministry confirmed that no Italians were on the flight, even though an Italian was listed on the manifest. Malaysian officials said they were aware of reports that the Italian's passport was also stolen but had not confirmed it." -- http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/08/wo...html?hpt=hp_t1

And air traffic controllers have one set of information, the military have another, and civilians have yet more. It takes a while for the information to be shared, and more time for it to be known to the media.

And air traffic controllers have one set of information, the military have another, and civilians have yet more. It takes a while for the information to be shared, and more time for it to be known to the media.

Unlike a few seconds to say "hoax" without doing any thinking.

Notice the numerous so-called 'mysteries' popping up in the news reporting. Those are deliberately planted as smokescreens and media attention baits, such as:

... The latest revelation added to the questions that have puzzled authorities since the commercial jetliner, carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew members, went missing early Saturday while flying from the Malaysian capital to Beijing: what happened to the plane, why was no distress signal issued, and who exactly was aboard?" -- http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/09/wo...html?hpt=hp_t1

The interesting question is if this apparent hoax is meant to be more than just a media diversion. Could be. We will see what happens in the near future.

If you wait more things will happen in the world to divert the people away from this story..as a matter of fact there is a high chance of things happening ALL the time ....so clever these ultra evil elite.

If you wait more things will happen in the world to divert the people away from this story..as a matter of fact there is a high chance of things happening ALL the time ....so clever these ultra evil elite.

Lol

I meant that the deeper purpose of a staged hoax in this case can be to stir up a debate around fakery in general. For example, was there a real plane at all?

And air traffic controllers have one set of information, the military have another, and civilians have yet more. It takes a while for the information to be shared, and more time for it to be known to the media.

Unlike a few seconds to say "hoax" without doing any thinking.

Anders thinks it's funny when people die. It's too much to hope that he'd show any restraint.

... Only now they found out that the airliner had turned back? Surely those who tracked the plane's flight path live would have noticed that.

And you are familiar with over-water ATC procedures in that airspace?

Where were they? Who is tracking the flight? Have you flown as a crew member or are you familiar with ATC procedures? You seem to make up stuff based on no facts, no evidence, and zero knowledge of the systems involved.

The new reports may not be accurate, and flying there is not like flying in the states.

As more is released I cringe at what sick fantasy you will concoct to spread lies and paranoia conspiracy style.

Yes there was a real plane...you really need to calm down and realize that accidents or other things happen the real world.

"However the flight disappeared, the mother of Philip Wood - one of three Americans on the flight - was resigned that he was gone. "You want to know how it feels to lose a son at the age of 50? It's devastating,'' Sandra Wood said. She saw her son, an IBM executive who worked in Malaysia, a week ago." -- http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...o-far/6221949/

That seems to be a real person, but he could have been in on the hoax and be safe, still alive, hiding somewhere! It could even be a vicsim.

"SEPANG, March 9 — Nearly 38 hours have gone by since MH370 disappeared from radar, but despite the massive search and rescue effort by Malaysian and foreign military, there is still no sign of the missing aircraft." -- http://www.themalaymailonline.com/ma...-sign-of-mh370

"(CNN) -- How can a Boeing 777-200ER passenger jet go missing for more than a day? Turns out, it's not so easy.

That's not just because the state-of-the-art jetliner has a wing span of nearly 200 feet and a length of more than 209 feet. It's also because it's bristling with communications gear, including radios, automatic beacons, GPS and computer communications systems, according to CNN aviation correspondent Richard Quest.

In addition to carrying UHF and VHF radios, the planes -- which cost more than $250 million apiece -- are equipped with Aircraft Communications and Reporting System technology. Embedded in the plane's computers, it tells the airline how the aircraft is performing -- speed, fuel, thrust. "If anything fails, it will send a signal to Malaysia Airlines," Quest said." -- http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/08/wo...html?hpt=hp_t1

"However the flight disappeared, the mother of Philip Wood - one of three Americans on the flight - was resigned that he was gone. "You want to know how it feels to lose a son at the age of 50? It's devastating,'' Sandra Wood said. She saw her son, an IBM executive who worked in Malaysia, a week ago." -- http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...o-far/6221949/

That seems to be a real person, but he could have been in on the hoax and be safe, still alive, hiding somewhere! It could even be a vicsim.

Anders,
Every tragedy in the world does not need to bring out your Chuckles the Clown conspiracy persona. Would you care to meet the families of some of the victims you accuse of complicity or being made-up entities. I'm sure it could be arranged. Jerry Springer would come out of retirement to do the show. Hell, Allen Burke would come back from the dead to do so.

Let 'em find the wreckage before you start your sick fantasies going, why dontcha? Why not drop into the RT comments section. More of your ilk on there alternating blaming China, blaming the US, blaming Russia. Like you, they've already solved it and it's the usual culprits: Some group I don't like.

__________________Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

Anders,
Every tragedy in the world does not need to bring out your Chuckles the Clown conspiracy persona. Would you care to meet the families of some of the victims you accuse of complicity or being made-up entities. I'm sure it could be arranged. Jerry Springer would come out of retirement to do the show. Hell, Allen Burke would come back from the dead to do so.

Let 'em find the wreckage before you start your sick fantasies going, why dontcha? Why not drop into the RT comments section. More of your ilk on there alternating blaming China, blaming the US, blaming Russia. Like you, they've already solved it and it's the usual culprits: Some group I don't like.

"However the flight disappeared, the mother of Philip Wood - one of three Americans on the flight - was resigned that he was gone. "You want to know how it feels to lose a son at the age of 50? It's devastating,'' Sandra Wood said. She saw her son, an IBM executive who worked in Malaysia, a week ago." -- http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...o-far/6221949/

That seems to be a real person, but he could have been in on the hoax and be safe, still alive, hiding somewhere! It could even be a vicsim.

the planes -- which cost more than $250 million apiece -- are equipped with Aircraft Communications and Reporting System technology. Embedded in the plane's computers, it tells the airline how the aircraft is performing -- speed, fuel, thrust. "If anything fails, it will send a signal to Malaysia Airlines," Quest said."

.
The ACARS system is VHF-based so it has limited range and does not work during trans-ocean segments unless the airline also invested in a satellite uplink for the aircraft.

As this was a 777-200 I would suspect that it would have a sat link, but you never know. Some airlines do not fit them on anything that isn't used on trans-ocean routings.

And even if it did have a sat link the messages from the ACARS system are little bursts of data that usually indicate a reading is outside of normal operating range on a particular system. It's not like they'd get a 100Mb data dump. You would, at best, get some engine performance and system failure indicators that tell you that something was going wrong with little to no real indication of why.

So the airline may or may not have data from the plane and if they do it may or may not include anything useful.

Yet another CT knocked in the cold, hard ditch of reality.

__________________.
Say what you want about the tenets of International Skepticism, but at least it's an ethos..

The sad thing about threads like this is that, ridiculous and stupid as they are, they will provoke responses which, while reasonable in their criticism, will get people in trouble. Just like this post.

Oh well, in for a penny, in for a pound. This is an utterly stupid thread.

__________________A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Even if a wreckage is found, it could have been a plane without passengers or crew, like TWA 800.

Why should I care about logical fallacies? I'm trying to see where in the MA it says that I can't argue from emotion. Emotion is a very handy thing for those of us who have it. It's the cause of sympathy and empathy which do not cancel out logic, but actually enhance it.

__________________Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

Why should I care about logical fallacies? I'm trying to see where in the MA it says that I can't argue from emotion. Emotion is a very handy thing for those of us who have it. It's the cause of sympathy and empathy which do not cancel out logic, but actually enhance it.

If emotions prevent one from looking into possible conspiracies, then that's a logical fallacy.

.
The ACARS system is VHF-based so it has limited range and does not work during trans-ocean segments unless the airline also invested in a satellite uplink for the aircraft.

As this was a 777-200 I would suspect that it would have a sat link, but you never know. Some airlines do not fit them on anything that isn't used on trans-ocean routings.

And even if it did have a sat link the messages from the ACARS system are little bursts of data that usually indicate a reading is outside of normal operating range on a particular system. It's not like they'd get a 100Mb data dump. You would, at best, get some engine performance and system failure indicators that tell you that something was going wrong with little to no real indication of why.

So the airline may or may not have data from the plane and if they do it may or may not include anything useful.

Yet another CT knocked in the cold, hard ditch of reality.

"Malaysia's air force chief, General Rodzali Daud, citing radar data, says there "is a distinct possibility the airplane did a turn-back, deviating from the course," but Malaysia Airlines chief executive Ahmad Jauhari Yahya said the Boeing 777's systems would have set off alarm bells if it did." -- http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...6-21929428579e

Surely, the Malaysia Airlines chief by 'alarm bells' meant radio signals from the plane.

That is not what you were instructed to produce. You show nothing indicating this is fake. What was unclear about my instructions to you?

ETA: What about this is funny to you? Is it that picture on the lead of the story of the anguished relative? How about the obvious pain the Air Force Chief is in as he delivers to terrible news? How about the thought of the last moments for the passengers and crew before the end? I'm just curious which sort of suffering amuses you more.

"An Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200, registration 9M-MRO performing flight MH-370 from Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) to Beijing (China) with 227 passengers and 12 crew, was enroute at FL350 about 40 minutes into the flight about 90nm northeast of Kota Bharu (Malaysia) over the Gulf of Thailand in contact with Subang Center (Malaysia) just about to be handed off to Ho Chi Minh Air Traffic Control Center (Vietnam) when radar and radio contact was lost at about 01:22L (17:22Z Mar 7th)." -- http://avherald.com/h?article=4710c69b

No turning of the plane according to that radar data. I would say both radar reports are fake, not only conflicting.

"An Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200, registration 9M-MRO performing flight MH-370 from Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) to Beijing (China) with 227 passengers and 12 crew, was enroute at FL350 about 40 minutes into the flight about 90nm northeast of Kota Bharu (Malaysia) over the Gulf of Thailand in contact with Subang Center (Malaysia) just about to be handed off to Ho Chi Minh Air Traffic Control Center (Vietnam) when radar and radio contact was lost at about 01:22L (17:22Z Mar 7th)." -- http://avherald.com/h?article=4710c69b

No turning of the plane according to that radar data. I would say both radar reports are fake, not only conflicting.

You would say? So what? What value does that have?

Why are you having such a hard time following my very simple instructions? I'll invite any other forum member to chime in if they believe I was in any way unclear.

In some parts corroborated by civilian radar? Does that sound plausible to you?

Do you see those two things at the end of those sentences? Pay attention here because this is important. Those would be questions marks. A key indicator that what you're producing in not evidence is that the sentence ends in a question mark. Now are you capable of following my instructions or not?

A key indicator that what you're producing in not evidence is that the sentence ends in a question mark.

Inconsistent radar data = fakery. Now, you can try to come up with a special case to explain it away. Be prepared to come up with lots of improbable exceptions in your defense. Your combined argument will end up far off the end of the statistical bell curve. That's my guess at the moment.

Inconsistent radar data = fakery. Now, you can try to come up with a special case to explain it away. Be prepared to come up with lots of improbable exceptions in your defense. Your combined argument will end up far off the end of the statistical bell curve. That's my guess at the moment.

I'm not making the claim young man, you are. Now prove inconsistent and fake are the same thing.